This is the latest ruling from the Court of The Hague in relation to the invalidity action against Louboutin's 2010 Benelux registration for "the colour red (Pantone 18 1663TP) applied to the sole of a shoe as shown (the contour of the shoe is not part of the trade mark but is intended to show the positioning of the mark)".

Kit Kat's long running saga to register the four-finger bar as a trade mark has taken another hit. The CJEU has confirmed that the four-finger Kit Kat had not acquired distinctive character across the EU and therefore must be returned to the EUIPO for further consideration.

The CJEU has issued its decision in the Louboutin red sole case (C-163/16), ruling that a mark consisting of a colour applied to the sole of a shoe is NOT covered by the prohibition of the registration of shapes, since the mark does not consist "exclusively of a shape".

Nestlé's struggle to register its four-finger bar as a shape mark has just suffered another blow as Advocate General Wathelet has recommended that the CJEU dismisses its appeal against the EU General Court's decision, which essentially found that it had not acquired distinctive character across the entire EU. In this blog we take a brief look at the opinion and what it may mean in practice to brand owners.

This latest development in the red sole saga concerns Louboutin's 2010 Benelux registration for "the colour red (Pantone 18 1663TP) applied to the sole of a shoe as shown (the contour of the shoe is not part of the trade mark but is intended to show the positioning of the mark)". This is the AG's second Opinion on the matter following the re-opening of oral proceedings for interested parties.

A follow up discussion on the recent Court of Appeal judgment in The London Taxi Corporation Ltd (t/a the London Taxi Company) v Frazer-Nash Research Ltd & Anor [2017] EWCA Civ 1729: Part II – average consumer

The latest decision in the Kit Kat saga was delivered last week, when the Court of Appeal confirmed that the four-finger bar had not acquired distinctiveness and could not therefore be registered as a UK trade mark. This follows the EU General Court's decision concerning the corresponding EU trade mark in December 2016, which we blogged about at the time.

In December 2016, the EU General Court also annulled the EUIPO Board of Appeal’s decision, which had found the 3D shape of the four finger KIT KAT valid. The EU General Court held that the board had been wrong to conclude that the mark had acquired distinctiveness through use across the EU, when the evidence only showed such distinctiveness in a substantial part of the EU. The General Court further held that the board had been wrong in its conclusion that the evidence showed use of the mark for all of the goods listed the specification.

Earlier this year, we reported on the opinion of AG Szpunar on the validity of an EU trade mark registration for the shape of the Rubik's Cube. On 10 November 2016, the CJEU made its decision on the case.

On 25 May 2016, Advocate General Szpunar gave his opinion on the validity of an EUTM registration for the shape of the Rubik's Cube. The Advocate General's opinion concerns whether trade mark is invalid because it concerns a shape shape that is necessary to achieve a technical result.